Excerpt From Press Conference on Sept. 24, 1999Press conference held outside the Regent Wilshire Hotel in Beverly Hills. Representatives from ABC, KABC, KCAL, KCBS, KNBC, FOX, KCOP, CNN, Extra and others attended.
Peterson: ...for two years now and we want to announce some of our findings which are somewhat contrary to the official line of Boulder quote-unquote authorities. We think should get on the right track. We realize it's been a myopic investigation there--different approach--Grand Jury for a year and we think we know who did it. In the next couple of days we'll pass out some of our handwriting comparisons--compare them with the ransom note, and other findings. Some of the people we think they should retarget are -or at least have under the umbrella of suspicion-are one William Irwin McReynolds, and his wife, Doris Janet McReynolds. For those of you familiar with the case, you know that Bill McReynolds is Santa Claus at the Christmas party, just prior to JonBenét's murder. And we think they should be reinvestigated.
RPTR: They've been cleared.
Peterson: Well, who hasn't, besides the parents?
RPTR: Besides the parents.
Peterson: Right.
RPTR: But Santa's been cleared, privately, if not publicly. So why are you picking on this man?
Peterson: No, he hasn't been cleared.
RPTR: He is not considered a suspect. It's amazing I know your case better than you do.
Peterson: You do? What do you know about it? How do you know he's been cleared?
RPTR: Well, if you want to pay me what the Ramseys are paying you, I'll tell you.
Peterson: You think he's been cleared on the DNA evidence? You don't know that because I know the case better than you do.
RPTR: Really. Please, don't let me interrupt.
Peterson: Let's be civil.
RPTR: Why? Are you saying that he should be reinvestigated or that he did it?
Peterson: I'm saying with 99% certainty that he did. We have handwriting comparisons here.
RPTR: But the CBI excluded both McReynolds and his wife from being the authors of that ransom note. How do you--?
Peterson: And who have they included?
RPTR: They have excluded the McReynolds.
Peterson: No, they haven't.
RPTR: What evidence do you have that leads you to think--?
Peterson: I have handwriting samples from when he was a journalism professor. We'll make these public in the next couple days. You know, I think it's been--there are a lot of people who have invested in the parents having done it. I think this thing happened after the O.J. Simpson case, and I think a lot of people didn't like them, didn't like their lifestyle, didn't like the fact that they have attorneys. And they don't want to believe--we could start with the psychological block to believe that old Santa did it.
RPTR: Who are you working for? Who's paying you?
RPTR: Yeah, who's paying you?
Peterson: We started out working for a client in Boulder, a Dr. Steve Dubovsky, whose daughter was molested in their house, and there are a lot of parallels to this case. A lot of parallels overlapped to this case, and--misdirected routes in the process. But we think we're onto the right route.
RPTR: You're saying this same suspect could have been responsible for both?
Peterson: No, no. We excluded the first one, who was involved in our client's case. But in the process, through that process, we got into this case with the blessing of the client. And determined--we know what occurred.
RPTR: So this is now paid for by the family, by the Ramseys?
Peterson: No.
RPTR: By Hal Haddon. A cut-out.
Peterson: No. I'm just gonna ignore you. Hal Haddon is their attorney--
RPTR: Yeah.
Peterson: --and he's an attorney, OK?
RPTR: So who is your client?
Peterson: We have no client. We had a client when we got into this case. It was a psychiatrist in Boulder whose daughter was molested in their house, and there are a lot of parallels to the Ramsey case. This person got in the house, hid in the house, after the alarms were set--or before the alarms were set, three hours later attacked the daughter. We thought there were parallels to the Ramsey case, and that's how we got into it.
RPTR: Was the person wrapped in cellophane like Santa would have had to be?
RPTR: Did you call this today because you think the investigation needs to be reopened into the Santa Claus character? Is that why this is called today?
Peterson: No, I think--realistically, anybody that's followed this case realizes that quote-unquote authorities in Boulder--I mean, they're the laughingstock of the country. Let's face it. I mean, they have absolutely nothing, zero evidence of the parents. It's dragged on, everybody's frustrated. Everybody knows it's a stressful case, but I think they need to look in another direction.
RPTR: What other evidence do you have besides the handwriting?
Peterson: We have a lot that we're gonna disclose to them in about two days.
RPTR: Who's "them"?
RPTR: For example. Humor us.
Peterson: We have an entire background on these people, going back to their childhood.
RPTR: Which implicates them as what?
Peterson: Which fits all kinds of profiles. That's kind of circumstantial. We think the handwriting is not.